Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
What Will You Do When Your Favorite Carmaker Goes All-Electric?
The EU has instituted onerous fuel-economy and carbon-emissions rules, causing many European automakers to declare that soon they will be building only electric cars. The EU determined that cars propelled by batteries emit no carbon that could be destroying Planet Earth; so they are prompting carmakers to quit making gasoline and diesel-powered cars. These changes are imminent, with Volvo (now owned by a Communist Chinese company) having announced last year that by 2030 they will only be producing electric cars. Just last week, Daimler, which makes Mercedes Benz cars, also announced that it will go all-electric by the end of the decade. Jaguar has announced that it will be all-electric by 2025.
So, what if you have aspired to own a Jaguar or Mercedes. Will you buy that electric car and risk being on foot if the power goes out? What if you will never be able to trade in that gas-powered Volvo for the newest model? Are you looking forward to the government essentially owning your car? Most electricity is provided by government-sanctioned utilities, so you will have few options for fueling up if all you are allowed to own and drive will be some kind of electric car. General Motors and Ford have also announced that they will be moving to building mostly electric cars. California and Washington have already passed laws against gasoline-powered cars.
Note, however, one of the big holdouts. Toyota has announced that they will not be building an all-electric fleet.
Nearly every week, I read a new article describing how this or that automaker has declared that they will be only building electric cars in the future. Not one of those articles has yet addressed what I think of as the most important question. What if the people don’t want electric cars? What if all those buyers and drivers out there are not one bit interested in driving a car which they have to constantly worry about running out of charge?
What will you do?
Published in Economics
I have used 303 Marine Clear Vinyl Protective Cleaner on all rubber and vinyl parts including the wiper blades for several years. It is far superior to anything I find at Walmart or local auto parts stores. It not only makes the wiper blades last forever, they clean better too. I got mine from Amazon but you can locate it at other internet sites too. A little goes a long way and treatment lasts about six months if your car is garaged. I wish I’d found it sooner.
Every area has to do a statistical / insurance analysis of what is going to happen to their weather. You are now going to tell me that every grid is going to make the same mistakes in the same direction, I get it.
They shouldn’t do that.
This is obvious to everyone now.
Warren Buffett has already offered to do this for the whole system. He gave them a price and I’m pretty sure they said no.
The disclosures and so forth need to be investigated. I would never do it.
I am going to order this right now. I saw a video about how you can use WD-40 in the same way. Thank you.
I wouldn’t use WD-40, it actually attracts dirt.
I think what they are doing is using it as a cleaning solvent. You don’t leave any on it.
But they do. Lots of them, all the time.
It should be, but I expect there are a lot of people in southern parts of Texas etc who would still refuse to pay anything else. Especially now, since it just happened, and so they’re confident it can’t happen again for another ~30 years.
I’m figuring Buffet would plan to make a profit from it, so I expect his “rates” would be higher than necessary.
Me neither, but there are people who invest in the stock market assuming that it will never go down, or at least not enough to seriously hurt them.
He’s entitled to make a profit off of it and he can make it happen a lot faster than any other thing they could come up with. I’m sure both parties can figure out what price is good or just not do the deal.
Not really, but it’s far less likely for something like a “cold snap” or “heat wave” to hit EVERYWHERE at the same time. The biggest problems I expect are the places that are removing hydroelectric facilities Because Gaea or whatever, and places like PRC (People’s Republic of California) which seem to be unwilling to have their own generation facilities regardless. It’s true that places like New Hampshire and Seattle may not have much excess power capacity in Feb because they have winter too, but places like PRC and Florida and Arizona aren’t running a lot of A/C in Feb, so they have excess capacity that could be available over a larger grid, but not a decentralized grid.
People shouldn’t live in areas that are poorly governed.
They were trying to heat the planet so they wouldn’t have to winterize.
There’s also the possibility that something like the Feb event could happen and Buffet wouldn’t be able to cover it all. Or that he would just dispute it in court and drag things out so that it’s the same as not covering it.
I agree with that too. But until you can come up with a formula for making people responsible for their actions including how they vote, it’s what we’re stuck with.
I would say that all parties are required to do proper due diligence.
Problem solved.
Oh come on. Especially these days, that doesn’t necessarily mean a lot. Even if they have a clause in the contract that “you will not take this to court,” they could take THAT CLAUSE to court and claim it’s unenforceable or something.
The hell it doesn’t. Both parties have to figure out if it’s going to work, make a contract, and set a price.
It isn’t that much different for alternative solutions.
Companies, including insurance companies, make contracts and set prices all the time, and then try to get out of it when the time comes to pay.
You and I have a different definition of “due diligence”. If they think Warren Buffett is a cheat and a liar, or overly litigious that is part of due diligence.
Interesting video but I don’t buy the guy’s argument at all. He makes a nonsensical comparison between being a king and owning a house(!?)
Here is a more complicated version of it lol
http://financialrepressionauthority.com/2017/07/26/the-roundtable-insight-george-bragues-on-how-the-financial-markets-are-influenced-by-politics/
Decentralized grid != small grid. The ideal is many small generators, well-scattered, with a somewhat over-spec’ed grid tying them together. The grid picks up the load for single or scattered outages, while local generators guarantee local power.
Local generation near natural gas sources could have kept supply from crashing .
I suspect it’s easier and less expensive to have especially above-ground electrical transmission lines rather than underground natural gas lines going to multiple scattered smaller generator facilities.
There’s already gobs of underground piping infrastructure going all over the supply zones–it is how they get their product to market, after all.
Electric service is way more ubiquitous than natural gas, many residential and commercial areas have no natural gas service at all. Also the delivery requirements for a natural gas power plant are likely to require new/increased pipeline capacity at most locations especially for a “decentralized grid.”
This. In our county maybe 5 square miles out of 663 has gas service. Electric and phone is ubiquitous; for example both the phone and power coops are the only entities providing (competing) fiber optic internet service. Many people have propane service but it’s a household tank with periodic deliveries of gas.
I was telling my wife about this post and comments and a thought occurred to me. Although many people on the left prefer that we drive electric vehicles over gasoline or diesel vehicles, what they really want is for us to walk, ride bike, or if we really need more speed — ride those big, beautiful government-subsidized trains. Does anything make a progressive’s heart beat faster than the idea of other people riding trains?
Let’s say we are 30 years down the road and we’re all driving electric cars and trucks. Will we still be able to buy electricity for charging our vehicles at the standard rates? Or will it occur to the Democrats of the future that there should be one price per kilowatt hour for running your washing machine and other household necessities and a higher rate for charging your vehicle, to discourage people from using their own private transportation? It wouldn’t be hard for building codes to mandate that there be a separate electrical meter for the automotive charger.
People need cars and trucks to move people and family around. They have far more utility. They don’t have this concept in their head very well if at all. There is no strategy to make electric cars work in this country. They are just forcing it and hoping for the best.
It’s just stupid communism.
The whole thing is madness. Much of what we need today depends on the byproducts of refining oil and coal ash. From all sorts of fuel to paint to plastics to chapstick, all are dependent. Even roads depend on the byproducts. What are we going to do? Keep refining and toss out the gas?
The refining process can be “tuned” to produce more or less of different products, but basically you always get SOME of each thing. The gasoline that must be produced, to some degree, will probably go to the generators for people like Pelosi to keep her extra-premium ice cream frozen while the rest of San Fran has a blackout.
Yes, come to think of it, how many Kw does it take to charge a vehicle? Most electric companies have a scaled rate, low for the first so many Kw used, then more for all Kw after that.